If you're a patriot you'll sign this.......

[Guest pelmetman]

malc d - 2017-02-11 10:35 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-02-11 9:34 AM

 

malc d - 2017-02-10 12:22 PM

 

I think we should beware of anyone recruiting " patriots".

 

 

;-)

 

 

So all us folk who have served in our armed forces, and those that are serving now are not patriots? *-) ........

 

 

 

 

People join the armed forces for all sorts of reasons - looking for adventure ? - like the uniform ? -

- looking for a secure career ? -- and I've no doubt , some join for patriotic reasons.

 

So without asking them all I couldn't tell you how many of them are patriots.

 

 

 

You should note that I said beware of the people who RECRUIT patriots.

 

They are the ones who persuade others to go and do all the dangerous stuff.

 

;-)

 

Like the uniform?......I doubt even the most shallow member of the armed forces joined because of the uniform :D .........I joined because it was an opportunity to see the world, and Britain was enjoying the benefits of working just 3 days a week, so my only other option was hairdressing 8-) ......

 

Fair to say I didn't consider myself a patriot when I applied as a callow youth, but I did once I'd joined, and I still do 34 years later B-) .............

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

malc d - 2017-02-11 11:24 AM

 

John52 - 2017-02-11 11:13 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-02-11 10:18 AM

 

 

Next time there's a war are you suggesting we arm ourselves with a few suffragettes? (lol) (lol) (lol) ......

 

 

 

 

Every country needs armed forces. But why does Britain need the most expensive in Europe?

 

 

 

 

That's because our 'establishment' is not good at controlling taxpayers money.

 

 

;-)

 

The biggest problem our armed forces have is a totally inept MOD *-) .........

 

 

[pepe63xnotuse]

pelmetman - 2017-02-11 11:44 AM

 

.......I joined because it was an opportunity to see the world, and Britain was enjoying the benefits of working just 3 days a week, so my only other option was hairdressing 8-) ......

 

 

..and that, coming from the bloke who supposedly semi-retired in his 40s and has since fully retired whilst in his mid(ish) 50s, was presumably 3 days too many for you then...?.... (lol) (lol)

 

(Just curious Dave - How did you get from being in the navy, to being a self employed pelmet and pouffe maker...?)

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-02-11 9:56 AM

pelmetman - 2017-02-11 9:34 AM

malc d - 2017-02-10 12:22 PMI think we should beware of anyone recruiting " patriots". ;-)

So all us folk who have served in our armed forces, and those that are serving now are not patriots? *-) ........patriotnouna person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors

all of them?The guys who won our freedom like the Chartists and Suffragettes were patriots because they did not do it for any personal gain. They did it at great personal risk witht the full force of the state against them instead of supporting them..The guys I know who joined the armed forces did it for excitement, travel, money, etc. Isn't it a bit of a stretch to believe they all did it out of patriotism *-) Personally I would be most wary of the sort of politician who needs an enemy. Hitler was one of the worst. But Thatcher was another. By refusing to allow democratically elected Sinn Fein MPs to take their seats in the Commons without swearing allegiance to her Unelected Queen, and refusing to let them put their case in the media, she ensured we had an enemy to fight. Without an enemy she had nothing to offer, and was finished.

YAWN....YAWN....YAWN..... Here goes our pet dissident?....anarchist?.....the one most prejudiced against most all and everything the country provides for him.........YAWN YAWN YAWN.

As you are clearly not prepared to emigrate to escape this country you criticise so readily I should imagine the day of your demise will be a great relief to you.  More to the point I suspect it will be an even greater relief to those who have the unfortunate position of being close enough to hear your bile because reading is is enough for most normal thinking people.....

[Brian Kirby]

It has nothing to do with patriotism. It has to do with the pursuit of justice, which is a bit more subtle. Where a wrong has been committed, whether by a member of the armed forces, the police, or a civilian, it should be investigated and tried if evidence is found. Blanket amnesties can be beneficial in trying to settle atrocities committed by warring factions, but, unfortunately, that was not the position of the UK armed forces.

 

The warring factions were the IRA and the (so called) Loyalists, the army were there to control their terrorism, so became the target. They were in a different league, but if the policeman does wrong, the policemen must be tried and, where appropriate, punished. To do otherwise has, IMO, the potential to create a very dangerous precedent.

 

The army were pushed into a situation for which they were ill trained and equipped. It was not their fault, and the number of claimed instances of wrongdoing are few and far between. Mistakes in leadership led, in part, to the disputed incidents, but responsibility for those incidents should be investigated and, if appropriate, tried in court. The time for leniency is after the trial and before the sentence, not before the investigation has concluded. That will just create the impression, worldwide, that there is substance to the claims, and the UK wants it swept under the carpet. I think an amnesty would be a mistake.

[Violet1956]

pelmetman - 2017-02-11 9:34 AM

 

malc d - 2017-02-10 12:22 PM

 

I think we should beware of anyone recruiting " patriots".

 

 

;-)

 

So all us folk who have served in our armed forces, and those that are serving now are not patriots? *-) ........

 

patriot

 

noun

a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors

 

I see my efforts to deal with the substance of the petition in your link Dave have drawn no comment. The petition doesn’t seem to be doing very well in terms of the number of signatories but I suppose it is early days.

I note the instigator of the petition mentions the very difficult circumstances that can arise when a soldier has to make a decision whether to shoot someone or not. Those circumstances will inevitably have to be taken into account when any decisions are made as to whether any soldier should face prosecution and if he/she does face prosecution whether he/she acted lawfully or not.

 

The petition which seeks to persuade people that there is merit in a debate in parliament based on an inaccurate premise and which makes such an observation displays some rather muddled thinking in my view.

 

On the subject of the dictionary definition of a patriot there appears to be scope for saying that (i) patriotism not always a virtue (the belligerent and dangerous N. Korea comes to mind) (ii) thankfully most (but not all) of our armed forces have acted and continue to act as true patriots in the various theatres of war in which they have served or now serve.

 

Investigating the very few members of our armed forces who may have contravened the law is supportive of our armed forces. I view it is as forming part of a number of measures that are essential for maintaining the very high respect that the majority of our armed forces are entitled to enjoy for their dedicated service. That is why Shiner’s behaviour is to be deplored; he has undermined the very legitimacy of such investigations as well as causing far reaching damage to soldiers, their families and the few potential victims of unlawful conduct whose cases remain to be resolved.

 

Veronica

 

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-02-11 12:55 PM

YAWN....YAWN....YAWN..... Here goes our pet dissident?....anarchist?.....the one most prejudiced against most all and everything the country provides for him.........YAWN YAWN YAWN.

As you are clearly not prepared to emigrate to escape this country you criticise so readily I should imagine the day of your demise will be a great relief to you.  More to the point I suspect it will be an even greater relief to those who have the unfortunate position of being close enough to hear your bile because reading is is enough for most normal thinking people.....

Thats just Ad Hominem. People who disagree with you should leave the country etc. I suppose its one step up from the warrior mentality (whatever the problem violence is the solution.) But its still a sure sign of having lost the argument.

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-02-11 1:33 PM

RogerC - 2017-02-11 12:55 PM

YAWN....YAWN....YAWN..... Here goes our pet dissident?....anarchist?.....the one most prejudiced against most all and everything the country provides for him.........YAWN YAWN YAWN.

As you are clearly not prepared to emigrate to escape this country you criticise so readily I should imagine the day of your demise will be a great relief to you.  More to the point I suspect it will be an even greater relief to those who have the unfortunate position of being close enough to hear your bile because reading is is enough for most normal thinking people.....

Thats just Ad Hominem. People who disagree with you should leave the country etc. I suppose its one step up from the warrior mentality (whatever the problem violence is the solution.) But its still a sure sign of having lost the argument.

Actually a more accurate description would be:

Fed up to the back teeth with someone who clearly dislikes most 'everything' this country has to offer and that permits (including the ability to spout such bile without fear or favour) one to enjoy in safety and relative comfort.  The spouting on at each and every tenuous opportunity to denigrate that which we as a country hold dear is quite frankly nauseous.  

Oh and in your rush to spout more rubbish you clearly did not read my post properly.....

I said:  

"As you are clearly not prepared to emigrate"......I never said you 'should'.  My point is that as you so clearly dislike most everything this country has to offer in terms of hard earned freedoms etc.....are clearly an ungrateful, ungracious and denigrating individual one presumed you might be happier (haha that's a laugh....you happy!!) somewhere more appropriate to your leanings although I am quite unable to think of anywhere that would wholly satisfy your grumblings.

[John52]

pelmetman - 2017-02-11 11:33 AM

 

 

I think you'll find now that Trump is no longer prepared to pick up the tab for defending Europe, that European average will be going up ;-) ..........

 

Trump can say what he likes, but he is liable to be over-ruled by wiser heads as we have seen already.

The Yanks would have deserted Europe years ago if they could. They don't defend Europe out of the goodness of their hearts. They didn't join in on our side until they were attacked themselves. They station their missiles in Europe so they can fight the Soviets on our soil instead of their own.

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-02-11 2:46 PM

.are clearly an ungrateful, ungracious and denigrating individual >

On the contrary I am eternally grateful for the courage and integrity of the Chartists, Suffragettes and early Trade Unionists who without any material reward, and at great personal sacrifice and risk with Her Majesty's Armed Forces ranged against them, and Her Majesty not lifting a finger to help, won the freedoms which you and I enjoy today. :-D

Without them we could stil be under the thumb of our unelected Head of States Armed Forces, like N Korea, Syria, etc etc :-(

[malc d]

John52 - 2017-02-11 2:52 PM

 

RogerC - 2017-02-11 2:46 PM

.are clearly an ungrateful, ungracious and denigrating individual >

On the contrary I am eternally grateful for the courage and integrity of the Chartists, Suffragettes and early Trade Unionists who without any material reward, and at great personal sacrifice and risk

 

 

(

 

 

Our armed forces are set up to protect us from the actions of other countries.

 

The unions / suffragettes/ Chartists were set up to protect us from our own establishment.

 

Different jobs.

 

 

;-)

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-02-11 2:52 PM

RogerC - 2017-02-11 2:46 PM.are clearly an ungrateful, ungracious and denigrating individual >

On the contrary I am eternally grateful for the courage and integrity of the Chartists, Suffragettes and early Trade Unionists who without any material reward, and at great personal sacrifice and risk with Her Majesty's Armed Forces ranged against them, and Her Majesty not lifting a finger to help, won the freedoms which you and I enjoy today. :-DWithout them we could stil be under the thumb of our unelected Head of States Armed Forces, like N Korea, Syria, etc etc :-(

Unbelievable parallels drawn John.....Like N Korea, Syria etc.....

Pray tell.....as you said 'still' which Monarch in more enlightened/civilised times have we had that can possibly be compared to those two?  ....and please note I said more enlightened/civilised times so no going back centuries and centuries in order to drag up some irrelevant nebulous tripe to support your bilious outpourings.

Clearly, like I have already said, you would likely be better off...and maybe less of an ungrateful a55hole if you went and lived somewhere that better fits 'your' warped idea of a nice country.

 

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-02-11 3:44 PMUnbelievable parallels drawn John.....Like N Korea, Syria etc.....

Pray tell.....as you said 'still' which Monarch in more enlightened/civilised times have we had that can possibly be compared to those two?  ....and please note I said more enlightened/civilised times so no going back centuries and centuries in order to drag up some irrelevant nebulous tripe to support your bilious outpourings.

Clearly, like I have already said, you would likely be better off...and maybe less of an ungrateful a55hole if you went and lived somewhere that better fits 'your' warped idea of a nice country.

 

At the time of the Chartists etc our unelected head of State was about as bad. And may still be if it wasn't for the Chartists etc who have made this a nice country I want to live in.

[John52]

malc d - 2017-02-11 3:15 PM

 

Our armed forces are set up to protect us from the actions of other countries.

 

The unions / suffragettes/ Chartists were set up to protect us from our own establishment.

 

Different jobs.

 

 

;-)

 

True.

Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.

As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.

All we seem to have is an unwritten understanding she won't use her power as long as things keep going her way. :-S

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

malc d - 2017-02-11 3:15 PMOur armed forces are set up to protect us from the actions of other countries.The unions / suffragettes/ Chartists were set up to protect us from our own establishment.Different jobs. ;-)

True.Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.All we seem to have is an unwritten understanding she won't use her power as long as things keep going her way. :-S

Such a sad misguided fool........

[John52]

I take it you have profited from her Majesty's Armed Forces Roger?

RogerC - 2017-02-11 4:29 PM

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

malc d - 2017-02-11 3:15 PMOur armed forces are set up to protect us from the actions of other countries.The unions / suffragettes/ Chartists were set up to protect us from our own establishment.Different jobs. ;-)

True.Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.All we seem to have is an unwritten understanding she won't use her power as long as things keep going her way. :-S

Such a sad misguided fool........

Since Ad hominem is the nearest I am likely to get to an admission you have lost the argument I'll leave it there

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-02-12 8:37 AMI take it you have profited from her Majesty's Armed Forces Roger?

RogerC - 2017-02-11 4:29 PM

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

malc d - 2017-02-11 3:15 PMOur armed forces are set up to protect us from the actions of other countries.The unions / suffragettes/ Chartists were set up to protect us from our own establishment.Different jobs. ;-)

True.Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.All we seem to have is an unwritten understanding she won't use her power as long as things keep going her way. :-S

Such a sad misguided fool........

Since Ad hominem is the nearest I am likely to get to an admission you have lost the argument I'll leave it there

I will take that(profited as above) as meaning living under the freedoms hard earned and delivered so preciously rather than merely the base and rather crass simplicity of £'s.......Yes I have in more ways than one can possibly comprehend as have you and the rest of the now free world. 

I am eternally grateful for their sacrifice,

As for losing the argument through Ad Hominem you really should look more closely at my posts John because there is no indication the argument is , as you put it 'lost' simply because there is no competition.  Ad Hominem is defined as: From the Latin.....literally ‘to the person’. Therefore as it is your denigration and bile, your constant decrying of most everything, oh other than Chartists and Suffragettes.....clearly in your mind championing the right to vote trounces those more costly, in terms of hard fought and costly freedoms that I am responding to I fail to see how it could be anything else.....so your point is?

You really should try to show at least degree of gratefulness to those who were, and are, prepared to 'stand on that line' and defend the freedoms you clearly hold so precious.  Without the sacrifice of millions you would be living in a much different world.......Under the Kaiser, under Nazism...or Communism....all of which would in my opinion be considerably more unpleasant than that which the greater majority enjoy today........take your pick.

Remember the wresting of freedom of speech/expression was costly in terms of human life.......it is that which you (more than most I have encountered in my wide and varied life) clearly enjoy.  Surely those that deliver it deserve a little gratitude especially from such as yourself who clearly makes use of it to attack so much that most of us hold dear.....and you do so without fear of censorship, legal suppression or state interference.  Surely that is worth just a little gratitude? 

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-02-12 12:12 PM

..and you do so without fear of censorship, legal suppression or state interference.  Surely that is worth just a little gratitude? 

 

As I have said I am most grateful to the Chartists, Suffragettes, Early Trade Unionists who won our vote and our freedoms for us. They did not get paid. They had Her Majesty's Armed Forces against them, not supporting them. They risked state persecution and losing everything. And yet they still have very little recognition. How many monuments are there to them compared to Military Men and Queen Victoria for example, and yet what did Queen Victoria really do for us?

[malc d]

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

 

 

 

 

Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.

 

As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.

 

 

 

 

I think it very unlikely that the queen will instruct ' her ' armed forces to invade Britain.

 

;-)

[antony1969]

malc d - 2017-02-12 8:58 PM

 

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

 

 

 

 

Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.

 

As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.

 

 

 

 

I think it very unlikely that the queen will instruct ' her ' armed forces to invade Britain.

 

;-)

 

Dunno ... Her and Prince Phillip did set up the sting to kill Diana with some fellas down the pub ... Prince Phillips whereabouts that night have never been accounted for ... John could have a point

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-02-12 6:57 PM

RogerC - 2017-02-12 12:12 PM..and you do so without fear of censorship, legal suppression or state interference.  Surely that is worth just a little gratitude? 

As I have said I am most grateful to the Chartists, Suffragettes, Early Trade Unionists who won our vote and our freedoms for us. They did not get paid. They had Her Majesty's Armed Forces against them, not supporting them. They risked state persecution and losing everything. And yet they still have very little recognition. How many monuments are there to them compared to Military Men and Queen Victoria for example, and yet what did Queen Victoria really do for us?

I give up.......now it's Victoria's fault.

How could I have been so blind.....It's the Chartists, Suffragettes and Trades Unions that have protected us from those that would impose their ways on our way of life......those that would invade and destroy our country.

.....It's the Armed Forces who have done nothing worthy of gratitude when compared to those denizens of civil unrest......

How can I have been so blind not to have seen that protecting ones way of life and freedoms merely requires a few people to rise up in civil unrest and protect us from those nasty naughty bad bad people that would otherwise like to invade and conquer us..........silly me.

Why didn't we tell Hitler we had suffrage and hence 'the vote' here in jolly old UK?  That we voted for him not to be a naughty boy and stop his military ambitions.....that should do the trick........and if it didn't we could all have gone on strike.  That would sort the blighter.

Now why couldn't I see all that before.......must be having been blinded by 'The Queens shilling'!!!!

[John52]

malc d - 2017-02-12 8:58 PM

 

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

 

 

 

 

Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.

 

As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.

 

 

 

 

I think it very unlikely that the queen will instruct ' her ' armed forces to invade Britain.

 

;-)

 

They have invaded peaceful protests like the Peterloo Massacre :-(

[John52]

antony1969 - 2017-02-12 9:07 PM

 

malc d - 2017-02-12 8:58 PM

 

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

 

 

 

 

Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.

 

As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.

 

 

 

 

I think it very unlikely that the queen will instruct ' her ' armed forces to invade Britain.

 

;-)

 

Dunno ... Her and Prince Phillip did set up the sting to kill Diana with some fellas down the pub ... Prince Phillips whereabouts that night have never been accounted for ... John could have a point

I don't think the Royal Family had Diana killed. But the fact so many take it seriously proves they are not held in the high regard that their hangers on claim.

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-02-12 10:02 PM

It's the Armed Forces who have done nothing worthy of gratitude when compared to those denizens of civil unrest...

So now you have gone from Ad hominem to Straw Men, putting words into my mouth so you can deride them

RogerC - 2017-02-12 10:02 PM

Why didn't we tell Hitler we had suffrage and hence 'the vote' here in jolly old UK?

Why didn't we just not declare war on Germany and let our 2 worst enemies Hitler and Stalin annihilate each other? Instead of declaring war on Hitler to liberate Poland, then leave Poland with Stalin who was worse than Hitler :-(

Or not declare war on Germany in 1914 which led to the rise of Hitler?

Incidentally the inhabitants of Hitler's concentration camps who we were supposed to be doing it for returned to their homes to find someone else living in them who told them to go back where they came from :-(

Problem with having Europes most expensive armed forces is politicans feel they have to use them. But fail to plan what happens afterwards so they usually leave a bad situation worse. :'(

What I also find remarkable is those of us who don't want to send our lads to fight are the ones accused by the Daily Mail Brigade of not supporting them. Wheras those most keen to send them into battle are portrayed as their supporters.

[malc d]

John52 - 2017-02-13 10:39 AM

 

malc d - 2017-02-12 8:58 PM

 

John52 - 2017-02-11 3:58 PM

 

 

 

 

Our own Establishment has arguably been a bigger threat to us than other countries.

 

As long as we have an unelected Head of State as Head of her Armed Forces that threat hasn't gone away.

 

 

 

 

I think it very unlikely that the queen will instruct ' her ' armed forces to invade Britain.

 

;-)

 

They have invaded peaceful protests like the Peterloo Massacre :-(

 

 

 

I hadn't heard about that and thought I must have been on holiday when it happened, so I Googled it.

 

Turns out it happened about two hundred years ago,

 

At the time we also transported convicts to the colonies for pinching a loaf of bread - are you also concerned that that might happen again ?

 

 

;-)